On 01/17/2014 12:03 PM, Werner Almesberger wrote:
EdorFaus wrote:
... Although, hm. A bit of looking around shows that CC-BY-SA is not
compatible with the GNU GPL.
Ah, what's the problem ?
Well, IANAL, so I'm not sure really, but [1] at least says so for
CC-BY-SA v2, and the comments to the answer on [2] seems to say that
this holds for v3 as well. I haven't really looked into it in very much
detail though, so I suppose at least the latter could be wrong.
[1]: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#ccbysa
[2]:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5462305/is-creative-commons-attribution-3-0-compatible-with-gpl-v2
Or if you were asking why incompatibility is a problem, well, mostly
just that it would make it hard to include parts of one in the other,
which might possibly be useful for documentation? (Although I suppose
such uses might fall under fair use or something? I don't really know.)
I'm not sure if it's really a significant issue in practice, and my
search results also indicate many just ignore the issue and combine them
anyway, whether or not that's technically legal in their case.
P.S. Things would be *so* much simpler if only everyone could use
CC0 instead of all these other licenses... Fat chance of that
happening though.
[snip reasons why we can't do that]
Yeah, that's pretty much precisely what I meant - it would be nice if we
could, but in practice, we *can't*, so we won't. No matter how complex
that makes things.
I do see that I wasn't very clear about that though, sorry about that.
It's basically the same line of thinking as I have with regards to the
core tenet of communism. It's a rather nice-sounding idea, IMO - but it
doesn't work in practice. We humans simply aren't built for it.
-Frode
_______________________________________________
Qi Hardware Discussion List
Mail to list (members only): [email protected]
Subscribe or Unsubscribe:
http://lists.en.qi-hardware.com/mailman/listinfo/discussion
